They are merely sayin it did not affect the results of the election, not that it didn’t happen, according to his spokeswomanfor the campaign. And I agree in that the fingering of the Russians was ready occurring simultaneously as the leaks were coming out.
You can just look at the posts the the preelection thread where the contents of the leaks and the fact that the Russians were involved we being discussed simultaneously.
Making it official doesn’t really mean anything. And we should have been retaliating at first blood would hAve been prudent, rather than rehashing it to invalidate the election.
It’s just a blame tactic and it’s not working.
It also begs the question why the RNC were able to foil the attacks and the DNC could not?
Never the less, how much Wiki leaks actally helped is questionable at best. Especially since the Russians were outed for it during the campaign and many articles proved as much.
The latest leftist accusations were that the Russians actually infiltrated the results of then election, and for that, there is zero proof.
"…Investigation calls it a less aggressive and much less persistent effort than the hacks of the Democratic National Committee…
Under ANY other circumstances; the GOP would have historically been “leading the charge” with something as egregious as Russian involvement is something as important to our Democracy as maintaining the integrity of our election. The President was correct when he said “Reagan must be turning over in his grave”.
Only the ignorant, partisan and uninformed would think for one instant that this election was lost because of Russian involvement. Clinton was a poor candidate; with way too much baggage; who allowed others to define her narrative (which interestingly enough is something Bill Clinton once said meant one had already lost); who faced a demagogue of a Candidate who tapped into the anger and frustration of important segments of the American electorate.
Although it has mentioned, I don’t think the fact that we were at the end of eight years of a democratic administration is given enough weight. IMO…this was the single largest ‘hurdle’ in this cycle.
And anti-immigrant blowback, for instance, was not what unified them. Mr. Trump proposed expelling illegal immigrants yet more of his voters, by a 50 percent to 45 percent margin, said illegal immigrants working here should be offered a chance to apply for legal status rather than be deported.
I understand this puts a kink in your desire to see White People Libertopia bust out once Trump is inaugurated (“Ein Volk!”), but these results are the what Trump voters themselves said.
Trump is no gem, but like Obamabots before you, you’ve projected a vision of what you want your Dear Leader to be independent of what he actually is. Trump won the White House by flipping a bunch of Obama voters in Rust Belt states angry at Democrats, not by unleashing hordes of Stormfronters who’d never voted before.
I understand this puts a kink in your desire to see White People Libertopia bust out once Trump is inaugurated (“Ein Volk!”), but these results are the what Trump voters themselves said.[/quote]
And again, why would you expect these polls to be accurate? You can lose your job, be attacked in public for supporting Trump. They were never accurate.
Let’s start with the obvious:
Being against mass immigration =/= Stormfront/Racist/nazi
Romney, just like Obama was very much pro-immigration. The reason Trump was able to flip those states was because he made his signature issue one of anti-immigration, something Americans have wanted for decades. Go listen to politicians even Democrats from the 90s. Plenty were in favor of limiting legal immigration and ending illegal immigration. It’s not a new phenomena.
The same can be said from that site you constantly post article from the national review. The early 90’s issues had plenty anti-immigration writers and articles.
No one knows what you say in an exit poll - the idea that people are fibbing out of worry that their employer might find out in an anonymous exit poll is ridiculous.
You must cry yourself to sleep every night as each day reveals uncomfortable truths about the real world.
And now we have the final exit polls. There’s no reason to think they’re unreliable - people pulled the lever for Trump and they also said what’s on their mind.
I know, I know - you’re sad there’s no electoral mandate for the ushering in of White People Libertopia. But there’s not - and you might as well prepare to be disappointed in other things once Trump is inaugurated.
My argument - exit polls proved unreliable evidenced by exit polls by showing Hillary was ahead when she lost badly. In fact polling this whole election cycle proved unreliable
[quote]My argument - exit polls proved unreliable evidenced by exit polls by showing Hillary was ahead when she lost badly. In fact polling this whole election cycle proved unreliable
Your response : they’re reliable![/quote]
You haven’t pointed to a credible reason Trump voters would not accurately describe their voting preferences in an exit poll. Polls re: Hillary are a different matter.
You’ve only said “exit polls were wrong on Hillary so these polls on Trump voters’ preferences on immigration must be wrong too!!”
Is that so? Tell me, Raj, if those same exit polls went the opposite way and showed, say, 75% of Trump voters favoring anti-immigration stances (no path to citizenship, etc.), would you be warning us as to the uselessness of the polls?
Of course not. And that’s because you selectively believe what you want regardless of where the data take you. If it agrees with you, it’s reliable - if it doesn’t…unreliable!
[quote]Learn how to construct an argument
[/quote]
You haven’t pointed to a credible reason Trump voters would not accurately describe their voting preferences in an exit poll. Polls re: Hillary are a different matter.
You’ve only said “exit polls were wrong on Hillary so these polls on Trump voters’ preferences on immigration must be wrong too!!”[/quote]
Shy Trump voters. They didn’t want to identify as supporters of Trump in anonymous situation or not. Otherwise the polling throughout the election cycle would have shown Trump routinely in the lead.
I don’t accept any polling results from this election cycle. Why would I? It has proven unreliable.
Now unless you can construct an argument as to why polling data this election cycle should be taken seriously, don’t bother responding.
Einstin, the responders in this exit poll are self-identifed Trump voters. They already identified as Trump supporters.
You think people were alternately not shy about saying they voted for Trump but shy about saying why they did? Absurd.
Your theory makes zero sense. The 50-45 split was a split among self-identified Trump voters. There is no basis to think these people weren’t telling the truth when asked about immigration.
Nonsense - your position refuted, you’re just going to double down on sheer lunacy. Trump voters are more than happy to cop to voting for him, but suddenly turn sheepish when asked if they think there should be a pathway for illegal immigrants to become citizens and therefore they lie about it out of embarrassment?
And a slight aside, but you used to crow how polls showed that majorities favored anti-immigration positions - which undercuts completely your new, convenient position that voters are too afraid to admit to having anti-immigration beliefs so polls can’t be trusted on this issue.